MaxWilder wrote:Say three of the nominees get 45% of the vote: 20%, 15% and 10% (50, 37 and 25 votes), leaving 55% (138 votes) for the other two. There are 18 win/lose outcomes (87-51, 86-52, ..., 70-68) and one tie outcome (69-69); i.e., a 5.3% chance (1/19) of a tie.

Shouldn't the win/lose outcomes be counted twice? Because 87-51 would actually describe two scenarios: Gaga getting 87, Close getting 51, or Close getting 87, and Gaga getting 51. And then, theoretically, you could also consider the scenarios where Gaga gets 0, Close gets 138, Close gets 0, Gaga gets 138.

I assumed the third place finisher gets 50 votes, so second place gets at least 51; getting 0 would make Close or Gaga last place. Anyhow, I made so many assumptions here that I don't think any of this would stand up to scrutiny!

MaxWilder wrote:Say three of the nominees get 45% of the vote: 20%, 15% and 10% (50, 37 and 25 votes), leaving 55% (138 votes) for the other two. There are 18 win/lose outcomes (87-51, 86-52, ..., 70-68) and one tie outcome (69-69); i.e., a 5.3% chance (1/19) of a tie.

Shouldn't the win/lose outcomes be counted twice? Because 87-51 would actually describe two scenarios: Gaga getting 87, Close getting 51, or Close getting 87, and Gaga getting 51. And then, theoretically, you could also consider the scenarios where Gaga gets 0, Close gets 138, Close gets 0, Gaga gets 138.

I may be overthinking it though. (Currently teaching a Probability/Stats unit with my Pre-Cal class, so probabilities are on the brain.)

Like many others, I've always considered Broadcast Film Critics ties to be code for "We're not sure who's going to win the Oscar."

But credit where it's due, some of their choices this year were a little off-brand for them, so maybe I should take it a little bit easy on them.

Mister Tee wrote:As for the likelihood of ties: they're never particularly likely once you get past 10-20 voters (the LA critics' propensity for ties is, thus, more understandable). Given the Broadcasters' not-even-concealed lust to be The Best Oscar Predictors Ever, the frequency with which they come up with ties in opaque races makes suspicion the default setting.

You may be right. I never thought of that, but then I've never been big on conspiracy theories, aside from the current one about Trump being a Russian agent. That one is too in your face not to believe.

“‎Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.” - Voltaire

Mister Tee wrote:Saying "this was a tie and it reminds me there was another tie" isn't terribly striking. (And " she tripped on the way up there" doesn't add much, either.) The fact that the two winners of one tie played roles that were later played by the winners of the second tie is the salient portion. And I don't see that mentioned or even implied in your original post.

I was tired and didn't feel like going into a long story but I did think of it.

That there was a tie, the second of the evening, just made me roll my eyes until Gaga tripped, then it hit me. Fifty years ago there was that tie between Hepburn in The Lion in Winter and Streisand in Funny Girl and oh yeah, Close played Hepburn's role on TV while Gaga was, of course, playing a role Stresiand previously played. I thought that was rather obvious to anyone with an encyclopedic knowledge of the Oscars (like you!) once you draw the connection between the two events. I'd be curious to know how many others had the same flashback.

In any event, that fifty year coincidence still has nothing on Jefferson and Adams dying on July 4, 1826, the fiftieth anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.

“‎Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.” - Voltaire

Consider that the OFCS, of which I'm a member and GC member, which is roughly the size of the BFCA (which last I checked was over 350 members on the film side), has had a grand total of four ties in its 22-year history. The most recent was in 2001 when there were two ties (Picture & Original Screenplay) and then the year before 2000 had another two (Supporting Actor & Ensemble). And that's it. Ever. Four. They have to be using some sort of statistical mumbo-jumbo (such as vote tallies within X% of one another are considered a tie) to get ties because an equal-number tie is statistically difficult with the size of the membership and a lack of active collusion going on.

Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin

The winners that night were of course Katharine Hepburn for The Lion in Winter and Barbra Streisand.

Glenn Close subsequently played that Lion in Winter role in a TV movie.

Tonight, she tied for an award with Lady Gaga, playing a role last played by Barbra Streisand.

You mean you needed someone at Awards Watch to remind you of that? I would have thought everyone here with knowledge of previous Oscar wins would have thought of that in the moment.

Big Magilla wrote:The Glenn Close - Lady Gaga tie reminded me of the 1968 Oscar tie between Katharine Hepburn and Barbra Streisand right down to Gaga's tripping a la Streisand on the way to the podium.

Did you, like, read my whole post?

Saying "this was a tie and it reminds me there was another tie" isn't terribly striking. (And " she tripped on the way up there" doesn't add much, either.) The fact that the two winners of one tie played roles that were later played by the winners of the second tie is the salient portion. And I don't see that mentioned or even implied in your original post.

As for the likelihood of ties: they're never particularly likely once you get past 10-20 voters (the LA critics' propensity for ties is, thus, more understandable). Given the Broadcasters' not-even-concealed lust to be The Best Oscar Predictors Ever, the frequency with which they come up with ties in opaque races makes suspicion the default setting.

MaxWilder wrote:How many voters are there? Three ties in 11 years seems very improbable.

Approximately 250.

Now that I think about it, ties aren't terribly unlikely with 250 voters.

Say three of the nominees get 45% of the vote: 20%, 15% and 10% (50, 37 and 25 votes), leaving 55% (138 votes) for the other two. There are 18 win/lose outcomes (87-51, 86-52, ..., 70-68) and one tie outcome (69-69); i.e., a 5.3% chance (1/19) of a tie.

Of course, it's extremely unlikely that this nice and tidy scenario will occur every time, so ties will not happen anywhere near 5% of the time.

This is also the third tie the BFCA has cooked up in Best Actress. The last two sets were also in highly competitive years. 2008 & 2009. 2008 was between Anne Hathaway & Meryl Streep (neither won) and 2009 was Sandra Bullock & Meryl Streep. Bullock won.

Wesley Lovell

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin

The winners that night were of course Katharine Hepburn for The Lion in Winter and Barbra Streisand.

Glenn Close subsequently played that Lion in Winter role in a TV movie.

Tonight, she tied for an award with Lady Gaga, playing a role last played by Barbra Streisand.

You mean you needed someone at Awards Watch to remind you of that? I would have thought everyone here with knowledge of previous Oscar wins would have thought of that in the moment.

Big Magilla wrote:The Glenn Close - Lady Gaga tie reminded me of the 1968 Oscar tie between Katharine Hepburn and Barbra Streisand right down to Gaga's tripping a la Streisand on the way to the podium.

“‎Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.” - Voltaire